Re: [2.4.20-ck7] good compressed caching experience

[Kimmo Sundqvist <rabbit80@mbnet.fi>]

On Tuesday 27 May 2003 00:11, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Tue, 27 May 2003 04:50, Kimmo Sundqvist wrote:

> > Just a warning... both systems have only ReiserFS partitions.  Other FSes
> > might still get hurt.

> This is definitely the case! If you try out compressed caching with ck7
> please do not enable preempt if you are using ext2/3 or vfat.

Is this a problem in ext2/3, pre-empt implementation, compressed caching or 
kernel in general?

I think I can still choose between compression methods, or can I?  Which one 
of them, on average, is the least CPU-intensive, and which one gives the best 
compression ratio?  I am also at loss how to interpret the percentages in 
"cat /proc/comp_cache_stat".

For M$ Windows there was once a program called MagnaRAM97 that had a similar 
idea, but I don't understand how it could report 2 to 3-fold compression 
ratios.  It always spontaneously rebooted the Pentium 133MHz after some 
hours, so I uninstalled it.

Just take your time, but will we see a pre-empt safe (or better yet SMP safe) 
version coming out anytime soon?

Compiling another 2.4.20-ck7 with 8kB pages and swap compression in the 
background.  I have now "mem=896M" to avoid the highmem boundary, even if it 
wasn't necessary.  Someone said somewhere that a 1GB system is faster without 
highmem support, so I haven't compiled it in for a while.

-Kimmo S.